Town targeting ‘key gaps’ in pre-election mailer process
“We had two elections where this worked well; then, we had this one where it worked very poorly.”
The system fell short.
With this summer’s special town election in the rearview mirror, Acton officials are pursuing new procedures to prevent a repeat of the problems that marred the townwide voter information packet.
“We had two elections where this worked well,” Town Manager Kerry Lafleur said last week, referencing the mailer system. “Then, we had this one where it worked very poorly.”
In 2022, Concordians voted to have the town mail out pre-election packets summarizing ballot questions, along with arguments for and against their passage.
The system hit a snag this summer when the mailer misstated the tax impact for a proposed amenities building at Acton-Carlisle High School’s Memorial Field.
Critics also objected to the tone of the sample “con” statement, which said taxpayers were being “bullied to ratify an overpriced building.”
The argument against a $27.5 million road maintenance package said, “We have not received an explanation for how we got here.” Public Works Commission Chair Andrea Solomon disputed this claim in a recent text to The Acton Bridge.
Officials sent a corrected mailer after a resident flagged the tax impact problem. Election workers told residents who had already cast an early ballot that they could change their vote. Only one person took the town up on that unprecedented offer, according to Town Clerk Kaari Mai Tari.
Voters approved the road spending and rejected the amenities project.
Acton-Carlisle School Committee Chair Tracey Marano asserted after balloting that the info issue “certainly” affected the results of the latter vote.
Conveying pros and cons
Tari brought new procedures to the Select Board on October 6 and said these are intended to plug “key gaps” identified this year.
The town must comply with state law governing how it develops and distributes election mailers.
It’s relatively easy to get arguments in favor of a ballot question, because most questions have support from an official committee at Town Meeting before the big vote.
It’s harder to get opposition arguments when there’s no organized committee rallying against an item. After this year, town counsel will solicit at least two options from people “best suited to present arguments.”
Hearing Tari’s presentation, Select Board member Paul Boehm said having two choices gives counsel options if one has the wrong tone.
The Select Board and ballot question sponsors, such as the School Committee, will also review arguments and summaries in the interest of catching errors.
Tari said town counsel developed this year’s mailer.
Select Board member Mary Hartman maintained in a phone call with The Bridge that she didn’t see the mailing until it hit her mailbox.
Board Chair Mark Howell said he remembers an email sent the day before the town distributed the document. But, he said, “it was fully formatted,” and wasn’t framed as an opportunity to review the material.
Tari told The Bridge that the Select Board received the packet in compliance with state law, but “there was no opportunity provided to review or comment on the mailing before its distribution.”
Howell said officials recognized after the fact that the initial 2025 mailing “should have had a closer review.”
Amenities building redux
Marano attended Tari’s presentation. The Bridge reached out for her thoughts and received a response attributed to her through the public schools’ contracted PR firm.
“The School Committee appreciates that the Select Board has reviewed the process for special elections and townwide mailings and is taking steps to ensure voters receive factual information in the future,” Marano said.
Officials have pushed ahead on the amenities building, and Marano said the panel remains focused on finding alternative funding through the Community Preservation Act.
Solomon said she’s glad the Select Board is taking action. “While the new process is a start,” she said, it doesn’t require a public discussion.
Hartman said she also wants more clarity on the new process, including an answer on who has the final say before packets — sent on Select Board letterhead — reach homes.
“I think we need to get this right, and I’m not confident that we have yet,” she said.
